Skip to main content

Without exception, since 1960, the winner of the White House has won at least two of the Big Three battleground states: Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. It's hard to picture a presidential contest that doesn't revolve around those three states, and indeed, those three states are among the top four in Obama campaign field offices to date: Ohio (20), Virginia (17), Pennsylvania (14), and Florida (13).

Yet the rise of the Latino electorate is shifting the nation's balance of power, giving rise to a more electorally relevant Southwest—a combination of blistering population growth and pro-Democratic demographic shifts.

In 1960, the states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona totalled 17 electoral votes. Today, they total 31. And while in 1960 Ohio and Pennsylvania had 57 electoral votes between the two, today that number is just 38 (though if you include Florida, the total has remained at a constant 67).

What this all means is that if Democrats sweep the competitive Southwestern states, Ohio, Penn and Florida become that much less important. Let's start with a base map, plus giving Obama Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico. I gave Missouri to the GOP, and Wisconsin and Michigan to Obama because those are marginal swing states—if Obama wins Missouri, he's already crushed on the rest of the map, and vice a versa with Wisconsin and Michigan.

Base EV map with Obama winning NV, AZ, NM, CO: Obama 253, Romney 180
As you can see, sweeping those Southwestern states puts Obama just 17 electoral votes shy of victory, while Romney is a whopping 90 electoral votes out. Indeed, Romney could sweep the Big Three, and look what it does:
Base EV map with Obama winning NV, AZ, NM, CO, Romney winning OH, PA, and FL: Obama 253, Romney 247
The race is still not decided, with Romney still 23 electoral votes shy of victory—something no single state will provide. At that point, it's a matter of math—several combinations do the trick. But note, Virginia has consistently given Obama some of his biggest polling margins to date. Romney would have to sweep North Carolina, Iowa and New Hampshire to win the race.

Now, I'm not suggesting that Obama will lose the Big Three, or that they're not important. They are still likely to be the hardest fought states this cycle. And I'm also not suggesting that Arizona is in the bag for Team Blue. It still leans Red. But changing population patterns and demographics (mostly Latinos) are evolving the electoral college map. There are new paths to victory.

And by broadening the playing field (Arizona this year, and Texas, Georgia and Montana in future cycles), and locking down old battlegrounds (Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and possibly Wisconsin and Michigan) the GOP's path to presidential victory becomes increasingly complicated.

Originally posted to kos on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:03 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (129+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hillbrook green, greengemini, FiredUpInCA, MKDAWUSS, Davidsfr, jdmorg, jennyp, JamieG from Md, Thinking Fella, OrangeMike, Supavash, TomP, kjoftherock, wu ming, Ian S, Bin Bin, myadestes, Shakludanto, Gooserock, Egalitare, Gowrie Gal, Nina Katarina, boadicea, bluedust, FlyingToaster, sydneyluv, kitebro, sallystrutt, lgmcp, COBALT1928, here4tehbeer, dle2GA, immigradvocate, xanthippe2, dopper0189, Railfan, Leftcandid, eXtina, TheGreatLeapForward, klompendanser, Timmethy, Eric Nelson, lostinamerica, TheLizardKing, slowbutsure, sebastianguy99, Urizen, asm121, ParkRanger, fcvaguy, GeorgeXVIII, fumie, OIL GUY, New Rule, Rooe, MI Sooner, sd4david, trumpeter, a2nite, SaintC, eeff, sailmaker, BasharH, uciguy30, wdrath, dagnome, mapamp, elziax, pucklady, jakedog42, lordrings, wasatch, TomFromNJ, Sean Robertson, fou, HoundDog, Tea and Strumpets, Intellectually Curious, jardin32, camlbacker, kalika, Loudoun County Dem, TofG, wide eyed lib, aj2k, zestyann, YoungArizonaLiberal, Wendy Slammo, Perspective, ManhattanMan, Heart of the Rockies, rasbobbo, rebel ga, dm92, ljb, OLinda, Involuntary Exile, skohayes, New Dawning, Danish Brethren, Anne Elk, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, Zack from the SFV, xenothaulus, Mr MadAsHell, Odysseus, TexMex, Jeau, MySobriquet, Blue Shark, ayoosilver, cka, PAbluestater, nomandates, michaeloberg, pollbuster, pademocrat, thomask, jes2, MazeDancer, mconvente, flavor411, Remediator, Matt Z, TRPChicago, joedemocrat, Jujuree, maybeeso in michigan, Dopeman
  •  Kudos, kos (39+ / 0-)

    This new "series" has been very enlightening. Whether you agree with the concept of the Electoral College or not, it is the way the Prez is elected and these analyses are contributing to a clearer picture of how the race is evolving.

    OK. And now we begin the part of the show where we pull out individual words and phrases of the commenter to try to determine the "real" meaning of the comment.... let the games begin.

    by hillbrook green on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:10:05 PM PDT

    •  agreed! (10+ / 0-)

      this is substantive, smart analysis. Love it.

      Come a Willing Servant, Go an Able Culprit.

      by Bin Bin on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:24:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Although We Still Need To Strongly, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe wobblie

      Get Out The Democratic Vote, IMO, I see Pres Obama definitely winning again.

      Red states, blue states, electoral college etc. Mock Republicans [Recall walker] Yes We Can!

      Ohio and Penn, better vote for Obama if they want the EPA and Florida better vote for Obama if they don't want their Everglades turned into tract houses.

      Michigan is for Obama; for sure, since the republicans have totally destroyed it over the past 50 years. As with, big cities everywhere, in the entire country! Wisconsin is also for sure.

      And so on.
      I think; even most level headed republicans are sick of the state of the economy and realize that they have no choice, except to vote for Obama, if just to save themselves.

      Obama's the one with the brains! And he's got Joe Biden, who is a very smart man.

      Great diary Kos!
      I rec'd, hotlisted, liked, tipped, and shared it on my FB page.


      Brought To You By That Crazed Sociologist/Media Fanatic rebel ga Be The Change You Want To See In The World! Gandhi

      by rebel ga on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:27:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nice, and it's all about the ground game. nt (9+ / 0-)

    Republicans only care about themselves, their money, & their power.

    by jdmorg on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:11:07 PM PDT

    •  We crushed the GOP ground game in 2008 in NH (26+ / 0-)

      I shit you not when I say there were probably thousands of people canvassing NH in the final weekend of the general. Just the regional office in Portsmouth must have had over a 100 people alone just for the morning orientation. There were smaller offices scattered throughout the county and even large numbers of volunteers camped out in people's homes.

      In Hampton Falls, at a major intersection of US Rt. 1, there was a single McPalinite holding a placard. That was the extent of McCain involvement in Rockingham County that I witnessed. I don't doubt there were others, but the single guy holding a sign was just symbolic of the lack of enthusiasm GOPers had for their ticket. Do you really think Willard RomneyBot is going to get people out to vote. Also, Koch and Citizens United money might be great for TV advertising and big fancy buses to schlep in some freeloaders but they suck for GOTV. Romney make Dole seem charismatic.

      •  Actually, Romney has a better shot... (9+ / 0-)

        ... he can bus Mormon kids up from Boston to canvas.  

        But NH is still going to be a hard one to get.

      •  thanks Dirk! (10+ / 0-)

        as one of those canvassers, it's nice to be remembered.
        My brother still lives in MA, and he is concerned that R-money may pull off that very blue state, just on the "one of us" meme. And after what happened to Kennedy's seat, I cannot dismiss that fear out of hand. Regardless of the quality of the campaign, it was unthinkable that that seat in particular would go to a republican.
        NH has been flirting with a deep kind of (R) flavored insanity since 2010, as has Maine. Neither of those states should be considered safe, especially if the European Flu gets worse.

        We New Englanders have our work cut out for us. We need not only to keep this whole corner of the country blue in the POTUS race, but turn back the Red Tide in the House and Senate.

        Class war has consequences, and we are living them.

        by kamarvt on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:43:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  2 years of teapartyhardright crazy governance (7+ / 0-)

          should make for a swing back to democrats in ME and NH, IMO.

          I don't think the majority of people anywhere really want
          to governed by the american taliban.

          It hasn't helped Ohio or Wisconsin. Obama is ahead
          in those states, I think BECAUSE the republicans have

          Today's problems are yesterday's solutions. Don Beck

          by Sherri in TX on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:53:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Thank you for your work, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          HoundDog, kamarvt

          and I appreciate your continued efforts for 2012.  I think that the last Sen. Brown opponent was not up to Ms. Warren's level, and that will hopefully swing the pendulum back to (D) for Senator Kennedy's seat.  I did read your "quality of the campaign" comment, but I think that was a difference maker.  However, that also gives Sen. Brown the "incumbency" label, which as I'm sure you know is an obstacle.

          Again, thanks for your efforts and best of luck with 2012!!!

          The only force that can overcome an idea and a faith is another and better idea and faith, positively and fearlessly upheld. Dorothy Thompson.

          by Intellectually Curious on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:16:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Ditto. But Elizabeth needs to get her butt in gear (7+ / 0-)

          We sent carloads of people north in '08. It was scary the number of people who showed up, and how well organized the campaign was. I don't know how many people will do the same this year. Important elections in MA will keep some people home.

          I'd like to feel better about NH. But they dove into the deep end of the crazy pool in '10 and I am not sure they are ready to crawl out. My brother-in-law's running for state senate up there, and his opponent is one of the craziest.

          If Rmoney's going to win, he's going to need to pick off a New England state, or two. Or make us fight for them.

          I'd like to say better things about the Warren campaign. But I am not happy to date. Tough to get a ground game going without things like literature and signs. Maybe it's my little purple town (a part of Scott Brown's old state rep district) but I can't get literature or signs. Phone calls returned would be nice, too.

          I've taken my complaints to state committee people. We'll see. Maybe some Kossack has more clout than I do. Cough. Cough.

          We got spoiled around here with Patrick's and Obama's campaigns, and the state party's grassroots support. The focus on the grassroots and the resources put into the ground game in those campaigns was inspiring. We built our town committee on the backs of those campaigns, and learned how to win on the ground. We're a bluer town today than 10 years ago because of them.

          She's raised a ton of money, but so far it ain't trickling down to field organizing. Maybe I'm paranoid and maybe it's early, but.....

          Thankfully, the Kennedy campaign is completely different, and well on it's way to holding Barney Frank's seat.

          Dear Republicans: The Handmaid's Tale is fiction, not a plan.

          by BobBlueMass on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:01:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  My first foray into participating (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            in political campaigns was a bust too.

            In 1992, which really was not that long ago in years if not technological advancement, I called the Clinton campaign and asked what I could do to help.  They totally blew me off and never returned my call.  It was a "we got this" attitude, and they did have it well in hand as it turns out.

          •  can you print your own? (0+ / 0-)

            or get a local print shop to do it? For less that $10 you can make a splash, albeit a local one.

            In Vermont, we have that problem a lot. I got corralled in my own front yard by my dem state rep when she spied my homemade lawn sign and pulled over to thank me profusely. She still says hi when I see her around.

            Ah, retail politics in a town of 1100. And a state of half a million.

            As for the zeitgeist of the 2008 race; we were determined like never in my adult life to break the grip of the bushies. I don't know that that sentiment can be resurrected in November, because the simple fact is that we have a democratic president, and we had a democratic congress (nominally) for the first half of his term, and things are still not good for most people. And 'most people' don't see the fact that republicans, and their ideas, are the biggest reason things still suck on so many levels.

            Now you please tell me how to get that across to a distracted mom at 4:30 PM on a Tuesday in October in Littleton NH, and I am all ears, baby.

            (that last is bolded because I want everyone who reads it to think about actually going out and door knocking. It's still the best way to win something that is damned important. ^steps off soapbox^)

            Class war has consequences, and we are living them.

            by kamarvt on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:55:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  We're heading that way (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              We may resort to that. Or something like it. But signs big enough to nail on a stick and stand on a corner? And write our own literature?

              We had town meeting Monday night. Hauled the state senator's signs out of the shed. Nailed up some Kennedy signs. Could only borrow one Warrren sign from another town. 400-500 voters. Committed voters. Probably all of them will vote in November.

              Wanted to canvass on Saturday. Could only get enough literature to for a handful of canvassers. Canvass without something to leave behind? Not homes? Distracted moms?

              Not encouraging.

              Distracted mom: do you want the same kind of life, or better, for your kids that you have? School? College? Jobs when they graduate? Read this. Hand her the brochure and leave her alone; or she (he? in our family it's me) might hand you a kid and take off.

              Dear Republicans: The Handmaid's Tale is fiction, not a plan.

              by BobBlueMass on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:19:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  To an outsider, this sounds like the Coakley ... (0+ / 0-)

            ... campaign.

            I'm all for enthusiasm going a long way, but comments like these and the ones about Michigan - where state-level offices are overwhelmingly and disastrously Republican - being solidly in the Obama camp sound disconnected from the reality that was 2010.

            I like Kos's map. There is a great deal of promise in some SW states. But several will be a slog - Colorado, for example, is hardly a sure thing.

            And as for voter suppression - new laws and regulations, feisty local clerks with quixotic views of eligibility, massive misleading advertising at the last minute (so it can't be countered effectively) - we ain't seen nothin' yet. A lot of mischief will stay under the radar as long as possible.
            I'm of the view that says this will be a very close election ... a 2% margin at the most. And that's at the top of the ticket. How many of the disenchanted-with-government voters of all persuasions will split their ballot?

            Obama and strong Democratic majorities in 2012!

            by TRPChicago on Fri May 04, 2012 at 05:41:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The M Word (0+ / 0-)

              Nobody's saying "Martha" yet. But it's on the tip of the tongue. That campaign was anti-grassroots.

              This is what happens when you rely on big money and big consultants. Those folks don't give a crap about the grassroots.

              Be nice if the folks here and elsewhere who've been pushing her and sending out all those fundraising emails would talk about the organizing and the grassroots, and less about media strategies and ads. Maybe make a call or two and ask how that field organizing is going.

              People around Kossackland (cough cough) talk about the grassroots, how the ads and robocalls don't work as well as they did. Talk about how it's all in the field organizing, "ground game is where it's at". Then all we get are videos of ads, poll numbers, and quarterly fundraising bullshit. Back room insider beltway who gives a crap.

              All that money and where's it going? How many field offices? How many field organizers? How many people canvassed? How many people stuffing envelopes, holding signs, door knocking???????

              Take all those f'in consultants, hand 'em a voter list, and tell 'em to come back when they've talked to each and every one of those voters. When that's done, hand 'em another one.

              Then I won't be tempted to utter the M word.

              Dear Republicans: The Handmaid's Tale is fiction, not a plan.

              by BobBlueMass on Fri May 04, 2012 at 10:02:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting but... (12+ / 0-)

    The map assumes the states in question don't have a partisan tilt relative to one another.  I can't imagine a situation where Arizona votes for Obama and Pennsylvania doesn't.  

  •  Mittens needs PA, OH, MI, and FL and more (15+ / 0-)

    It's amazing what the fruits of the 50 state strategy will bear. IMO, the bottom scenario w/ PA and OH going to Slick Willard is extremely remote. The voters in those states may not love the President but the overreaching Teahadi governors in both states will be a veritable albatross to the GOP.

    Florida and North Carolina are fairly close. Interesting to see if Amendment 1 becomes an issue in November. Iowa was last polled three months ago so I think that situation is overstated for R Money as well.

    Expect a bunch of bogus polls that say NJ is w/in MOE for Romney. Hasn't voted GOP since 1988 w/ GHWB.

    Lastly, I literally live down the street from NH. I live w/in walking distance of the border in NE Mass. I canvassed in 2008 both in the primary and general in Rockingham County (PS, I blogged about that in last week of the 2008 general here on DK). The Teahadi coup in NH has been marred by, well, stupidity. You have the Magna Carta bill, you have representatives arrested for DUI and resisting arrest. You have Bryan Fischer style homophobia. In short, I really don't think Romney has a serious chance of taking NH. IMO, Gary Johnson could take at least 1-2% away from Romney.

  •  At the very least, Rmoney will have to spend (18+ / 0-)

    money here in Arizona and that will help blunt the advantage of the Rethug Superpacs. I'm really glad to see the Obama campaign putting Rmoney on the defensive so quickly. If they can keep him off balance, it'll make it all the much harder for his Superpacs later on.

    Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

    by Ian S on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:20:14 PM PDT

  •  Is there a website yet that... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... projects the electoral vote based on current polling and updates that whenever new polls come out. I know 538 used to do that but he seems slow to get something like that up and running this election.

    No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.

    by Magster on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:25:04 PM PDT

  •  Those of Us In Those Eastern States Though Are (13+ / 0-)

    desperate for the extra support of a strongly fought Democratic presidential race here.  We have the #1 most liberal Democratic US Senator, but of course we also have the figurehead Speaker of the US House and Kasich & the Teabaggers in state.

    You really don't need any more northern laboratories for southern Baptist cultural rule and libertarian dismantling of government.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:27:39 PM PDT

  •  i love that the wild wild west is saving the US (5+ / 0-)

    i think my cat is possessed by dick cheney

    by Anton Bursch on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:30:34 PM PDT

  •  AZ ain't gonna happen this year but could in 2016 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, MKS

    in time for Hillary.

    Divide and rule, a sound motto. Unite and lead, a better one. ::Goethe::

    by Jeremy10036 on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:32:42 PM PDT

  •  is 2012 going to be another 50 state strategy? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, bobinson

    why I'm a Democrat - Isaiah 58:6-12, Matthew 25:31-46

    by marking time on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:32:56 PM PDT

    •  Probably not 50 state, but (10+ / 0-)

      an attempt to max out the Democratic share of the electoral college.

      Once Obama wins Arizona or Missouri, he'd probably need to start winning by double digits to flip more McCain states.

      It sort of captures the spirit of the 50 state strategy, but more efficiently - he's not going to be spending much time in Idaho, and I don't think Dean Howard would do that either. But going for states like Arizona, North Carolina, Virginia etc. is pretty bold for a Democrat, if one follows the conventional wisdom (aka bullshit).

      The reason the media likes calling states like PA or MI toss-ups is because they don't want their coverage for the next six months to be "Obama's probably going to win." He is, but that's a boring prediction. It's all about the ratings!

  •  We need Pennsylvania (15+ / 0-)

    Democrats have won PA in every election since 1988. Obama won by 11 points.

    There are no scenarios in real life (i.e., not tinkering on some map online) where we lose a state we won by 11 in '08 and then turn around and win a state that has gone Democratic once in the past 50 years (AZ).

    If we lose PA, we lost CORE Democratic voters, and something went horribly wrong. Wrong enough that there's no way we win Arizona.

    I'm not against playing offense in Arizona, but the map you're posting in this diary is a fantasy. There aren't any real paths to victory that don't include the Dems winning PA. Again... in real life. Not in an online graphic.

    •  excellent analysis (11+ / 0-)

      not only do we need PA, we need it all. every damn EV and every vote we can get in every state in the union.

      we don't just need to win, we need to validate and repudiate. we need the white house and the senate just to keep the status quo of putting up with GOP bullshit ever every issue large and smal. we need an Obama landslide and the House of Reps that would go with it to make progress.

      I think its great that AZ might be in play. the longer Romney is still selling himself to voters he shoudl have already is better fir the rest of us. but this isn't about new firewalls and margins for error. its about blowing the GOP out of the water this year.

      •  I don't Agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wu ming

        Western voters are very, very different from east coast voters.  Democrats and REpublicans are more libertarian.  This creates a whole different dynamic out here.  I could easily see Obama winning Arizona and losing PA, because Western voters are not what you define as core Democratic or Republican voters.  I could also see carrying Montana this time around given the right strategy.

      •  I'd love to see (3+ / 0-)

        a Johnson v Goldwater, or Reagan v Mondale type of map.

        Crush the Republicans, perhaps that will lead them to have a moment of clarity.

        We already have death panels. They're called insurance companies.

        by aztecraingod on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:44:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  republican clarity? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skohayes, ayoosilver

          The GOP got crushed in 2006 and 2008 then look what happened in 2010! They don't respond with clarity. They respond by doubling down on their insanity.
          Clarity isn't even a tool in their kit!

          --- Keep Christian mythology out of science class!

          by cybersaur on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:00:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  True, but (0+ / 0-)

            The wins in 2010 ultimately cost them in the long run because people have seen the effects of the craziness turned loose in the House and in some of the local states.

            If the Republicans get soundly thrashed in November, we can hope that the saner part of the party will FINALLY wake up and reign in the loony fringe, or that they will rebel against all the party purity tests and pledges and form a real third party.

    •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

      Penn. is the new tipping point state. Winning it assures victory unless Va. or Col. go down and right now Penn. is the closest.

      •  I think you have it backwards actually. (10+ / 0-)

        The tipping point states will be those states that Obama won right below his national margin last year, 6-7 points.

        Obama won PA by 11. He won VA by about 5-6.

        If Obama wins PA (Q poll today shows it at Obama +8, which I think feels right to me based on how the undecideds typically break there), then it signals a close but good-enough margin of about 3 in Virginia, which, again, feels right to me. And Obama is re-elected.

        Democrats can win without Ohio, but cannot win without PA. Republicans can win without PA, but cannot win without Ohio, Virginia, or Florida. Therefore, we just need PA plus one of those three states (whatever state that is becomes the tipping point in that scenario).

        •  The polls show we might both be wrong. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Last two polls in both Pa. and Va. had Obama +8 and +7%.

          But Colorado is strange.  The next to last poll in early April by PPP had Obama +13.  The last poll about 10 days ago by Purple Strategies had the race tied.

          Going strickly those numbers, the tipping point is Colorado.

          However, you could backout Col and win NH and hit 270 on the  nose.  NH. was +8 last poll.

          It'll be back and forth for the rest of the campaign, I suppose, but these are clearly the pivitol states.

    •  Quinnipiac has us up big (7+ / 0-)

      in PA in a poll out today. It's a double-digit margin.

      •  Based on some of the (0+ / 0-)

        county vote totals from the primary last month, I do think Obama has a potentially serious problem in the western part of the state (i.e., there are lots of places where the unknown, uncontested, statewide Democrats got more votes than Obama). But it's plausible to expect the southeast to counterbalance that shift--as it did in 2008.

        Ok, so I read the polls.

        by andgarden on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:47:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Offense v. Defense (0+ / 0-)

      Of course, PA is a must.  But that is playing defense, and it may need to be done.

      But Arizona is playing offense, taking away one of their states, and the mindf*ck that would deliver to Republicans if the Dems campaign there in earnest would be priceless.  Why, Romney in response would publicly eat a lot of enchiladas (and might even refrain from criticizing the restaurant from whence they came) and claim he really likes Mexicans.....telling people to forget everything he said about self-deportation and the like.  

  •  GOP knows this but... (10+ / 0-)

    gerrymandering the shit out of House districts means it will be tough to get a Dem House majority any time soon and the new constant 60 vote threshold in the Senate means the Senate can block anything and everything as there is 20 deep red states that will never elect a Democrat as Senator, and 15+ states that would be open to electing Republicans at any time - Dems will never control the Senate if 60 votes is the new 50.  

    •  Do we have a problem with proportional (0+ / 0-)

      representation, Maine and Nebraska as I undestand it, and with those legislatures which are not just controlled but dominated by Republicans,when nominally the Legislature and not the voters select the electors? I can certainly see the Legislatures in Mich and Wisc and a few other places voting R no matter what the voters said.

  •  Nevada used to be a solid Red State (12+ / 0-)

    The polls show a solid Obama lead.

    It is becoming more and more like California.....It will probably not be a battleground state this time.

  •  Montana... THIS cycle (12+ / 0-)

    We might not win it, as with Arizona, but it should be made competitive as the most recent poll showed.

    Similarly I would compete in North and South Dakota too. Particularly North Dakota and Montana as they are also key Senatorial battlegrounds.

    Likewise, Nevada and Arizona and New Mexico... and Virginia and Ohio and Florida. Key senate races in battleground or pseudo-battleground states.

    But the mountain north... North Dakota, Montana and South Dakota... and the southwest... New Mexico (already in the bag)... Colorado, Nevada and Arizona are expansion areas along with moving down the east coast... Virginia, North Carolina and into South Carolina and Georgia.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:44:15 PM PDT

  •  Virginia and New Hampshire (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    Live Free or Die baby!

    •  Obama can not rely on 270 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      There is no constitutional requirement for electors to vote for a candidate once they have been chosen by the respective state parties. One defection and poof the election is headed to the House, which even if we are able to accomplish taking it back, we would most likely lose because it is 1 state = 1 vote, and there are many more of them red ones and blue ones.

      Just a thought.

      What separates us, divides us, and diminishes the human spirit.

      by equern on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:24:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There has been one faithless elector (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        in every election for the past 10 or so. Faithless electors is a real problem.

        LANDSLIDE bitches!

        by pucklady on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:21:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Imagine the rioting! (0+ / 0-)

        We get like 270 to 272 votes and one or a few electors decides to vote the other way...  Man, imagine the fury of the American people.  Even some of the less insane conservatives would probably be pissed off.

      •  Do you know who gets on EV slates? (0+ / 0-)

        For the major parties, pretty much nobody who would do anything crazy like that.

        Ok, so I read the polls.

        by andgarden on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:49:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You do not vote directly for the president. (0+ / 0-)

          You vote for a slate that is determined by each party's convention. Generally speaking, at least in the state's I've lived in, that's done in an election at the party's convention in the year of the election.

          That slate is then called upon to vote when the President of the Senate calls for the Electoral Vote to be tallied. There is no constitutional requirement that the elector follow either the wishes of the party or the voters of that state...whatever the consequences of that vote might be.

          That is what's known in political circles as a "faithless elector."

          And we have had them in the past.

          Imagine states like Maine, New Hampshire, Colorado, Iowa, Virginia, or North Carolina. States that could harbor Democrats with strong independent streaks, or who have a desire to have their name in history books.

          The various psychological scenarios are terrifying.

          No, Obama can not rely on 270 electoral votes!

          What separates us, divides us, and diminishes the human spirit.

          by equern on Fri May 04, 2012 at 01:22:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Arizona Is Still Out Of Reach (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp, Supavash, bepanda, Matt Z

    according to a poll that came out today.  Pennsylvania is looking good for President Obama.  I also think that NM, Nevada, and Colorado is going to go for President Obama.  We would just need Virginia.

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:48:14 PM PDT

    •  I disagree. There is momentum against the "crazy (7+ / 0-)

      Republicans" in AZ. They are ruining the state making it an national embarrassment . Between the shooting of Gabby Gifford, racist and ineffective Sheriff araipo be investigated and costing the county multimillions in legals fees and the rising Latino vote, there is hope.
      Recent polling shows the gap is closing.
      And now with Republicans are trying to eliminate medicare, scaring the heck out of seniors.

    •  Thoughts (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ajax the Greater, bepanda, pademocrat

      1) The poll for AZ was done by Magellan, who make the evil house of Rasmussen look fair by comparison.

      2) Obama needs to fight for Ohio because the fight he needs to fight there will bolster his numbers elsewhere.

      3) I would like to see some polling in more traditional red states. I would like to see some new numbers from places like TX, KY, SC, and SD. While I don't expect any surprises, any unexpected ones would be welcome.

      What separates us, divides us, and diminishes the human spirit.

      by equern on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:29:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Can't believe TX isn't more up for grabs still (5+ / 0-)

    with the urban areas and rising latino vote, I would have expected it to be less safe for the GOP by now. Why isn't it closer.

    No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible.

    by Magster on Thu May 03, 2012 at 12:58:28 PM PDT

    •  Several reasons (13+ / 0-)

      1) Lots of evangelicals relative to the US as a whole.

      2) A still relatively large rural population.

      3) A relatively small college educated population as a share of voters

      4) Still low voter turn out rates among Latinos (although it's rising)

      5) A still heavily hydrocarbon based economy.

      All these factors tend to make states more Republican. Texas in 8 years may start approximating a state like North Carolina electorally.

      -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

      by dopper0189 on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:08:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well when (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sherri in TX, JGibson, bunk, pademocrat, Matt Z

        Texas does go "blue", it's game over for the GOP.  

        38 and probably more EVs would be impossible to make up.

      •  And an anti-government, anti-tax ethos. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bunk, bepanda, dopper0189

        A lot of the Southwest has historically had a mistrust of government, penchant for low taxes, and tolerance of low levels of state services. Texas in particular has no state income tax, and is near the bottom of the states in per-capita spending on education and healthcare. It's what Republicans wish the whole country looked like. It's possible public opinion is shifting away from regarding this as a good thing, but I wouldn't count on it happening rapidly.

        •  At some point Latinos in Texas will start (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          demanding better schools. This is the hidden issue (not immigration) that many GOP strategist are worried about in Texas.

          It's why the Bush "braintrust" (oxymoron?) were so fixated on education reform. At some point Latino parents are going to want better services and they will make the connection to voting and taxation that it will require. At that point the tax issue in Texas will go from be a clear winner for the GOP to a loser.

          -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

          by dopper0189 on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:18:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  White Texans are overwhelmingly southerners (0+ / 0-)

      That explains almost all of the political difference between California and Texas. (The rest is explained by the fact that the latinos do seem to be a bit more Republican there).

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:50:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Path of least resistance (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CA Berkeley WV, JGibson

    Penn.+Va.+Col.+ either Nev/N.H./Iowa

    It would also help if Virgil Goode gets ballot access in Va.

  •  Exactly Axelrod has said, past Democrats made the (8+ / 0-)

    mistake of not trying to expand the map and making the race come down to 1 big state, Gore with "FL,FL,FL" and Kerry with "OH,OH,OH".

    Clinton's strength was he put Arkansas, LA, Tenn, and KT in play, and was stong in WV. MO was a swing state that he won. Clinton expand the map and won, Obama like wise.

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

    by dopper0189 on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:03:24 PM PDT

  •  Cue Repub outrage at Electoral College in 3,2,1 nt (0+ / 0-)
  •  We have not yet slayed the beast (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, pademocrat

    Beware the vampire Mitt. His black arts of deception cannot stand the light of day.

    Re-elect President Obama because we don't need another selfish President

    by Timmethy on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:22:02 PM PDT

  •  This series has been great (5+ / 0-)

    much appreciated.

    I'm watching Virginia closely. Frankly, I'm surprised Obama is polling as high as he is here. But, I certainly love it. I was also encouraged by the fact that Virgil Goode is the Constitution Party's man for 2012. I'm hoping he pulls alot of Republican votes in SW Virginia that will benefit Obama. On the other hand, at the Falls Church Farmers Market this weekend, lo and behold, there's a Republican activist we know collecting signatures for the Green Party.

  •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Thu May 03, 2012 at 01:39:50 PM PDT

  •  If you go by general polls I'd make Pa. blue as of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    now and Arizona grey, making it

    or, with Florida grey also


    Not impossible for Willard but...

  •  i agree and disagree ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG, bunk, pademocrat

    If Obama makes Arizona competitive, Romney would have long lost the race. That's where i dont know if Arizona is a bellweather state.

    I still want the President campaign to put a lot of focus on OH, FL and PA because i am sure that Romney+superPacs will invest at least $100-200 mn in these three states alone.

    As i remarked yesterday, Romney has only path for victory - win ALL these 3 states - PA, OH and FL as well as win 2 of 3 states - AZ, NC and VA.

    •  As Arizona goes... (0+ / 0-)

      so goes the Nation

      Wait a minute... that not quite right is it?

      Oh yeah "As Missouri goes so goes the nation".

      But if Mittens is campaigning in Arizona in October we can go ahead and start planning the victory parties.

  •  Is NH really a swing state? (0+ / 0-)

    I was under the impression that the odd results of 2004 and 2008 notwithstanding, the state was steadily trending blue, and with better educated higher income folks entering the southern tier, they were in particular tuned into Obama (and turned off by the GOP primaries). Polling?

    Some people are intolerant, and I CAN'T STAND people like that. -- Tom Lehrer

    by TheCrank on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:40:36 PM PDT

    •  2008 in NH was explained to me... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Blue Shark

      ...that the state had a peculiar affinity for McCain and enough Is and a few Ds had gotten "accustomed" to voting for him in the crossover primaries, and that had been enough to pull the state over; but this was anomalous relative to the trend.

      Disclaimer: I have spent a LOT of time in the Newhampshiretucky part of the state so I don't really know the southern demographics well at all.

      Some people are intolerant, and I CAN'T STAND people like that. -- Tom Lehrer

      by TheCrank on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:42:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for this, kos! My favorite line: (0+ / 0-)
    ...broadening the playing field (Arizona this year, and Texas, Georgia and Montana in future cycles...
    I feel like Gary Larson's dog, with the cat approaching the dryer - Oh please, oh please!
  •  MI is more Democratic (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Knarfc, TofG, Be Skeptical, pademocrat

    than the makeup of either the House delegation or the state legislature would lead one to believe.
    The former is the result of a very efficient Republican gerrymander, and the latter is a combination of R gerrymandering and lack of D turnout in the last cycle.

    Note that both of our Senators are Democrats.

    Obama will take Michigan.

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Thu May 03, 2012 at 02:50:25 PM PDT

  •  It seems most likely Ohio is still most important (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG, Supavash

    Obama can lose the following states he won in 2008: VA, NC, FL. Iowa, and IN (and even throw in NH).  In my view, except for NH, these could well be lost.  Yet if he wins OH, he still wins.  If not, AZ will be insufficient.  With Ohio, all the sweat about the south (VA, NC, and FL) won't matter.  

    Maybe AZ will be truly competitive in 2016.  Nonetheless, it's not worth yielding to Romney, but if Obama wins there, it will probably be a landslide anyway.

  •  I don't think you can give AZ to Obama just yet (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Supavash, pademocrat

    but even if Romney wins AZ, IA and NH, Obama can win VA and NC, which his poll numbers indicate just might happen, and still win--even if he loses the big three. And I simply can't see Obama losing Pennsylvania, given the Dems' recent dominance there.

    oops. I hope the gate wasn't too expensive.

    Twitter: @DanteAtkins

    by Dante Atkins on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:10:49 PM PDT

  •  I think your analysis is very off. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG, jec

    There is very little indication Obama is going to win Arizona in 2012 (maybe the Dems can take it in later years). And there it little indication Romney can take Pennsylvania in some sort of a hat trick.

    I would put PA in Obama's row and Arizona in the GOP's row.

    Doing just that gives Obama 262 EVs, instead of 253.

    Assuming Obama takes Wisconsin and Michigan (I am not yet so sure; more polling is needed) he needs only Virginia to win. Or only North Carolina. Or only New Hampshire and Iowa. Or only Florida. Or only Ohio.

    Conversly, Romney would need all of these states to win. In other words, Romney'a chance of winning, if Obama gets to the 262 EVs mentioned above, is pretty much nil. To win Romney pretty much has to put Pennsylvania or Mchigan, and/or Wisconsin in play.

    Therefore the battleground states in the 2012 presidential election are these nine: PA, MI, WI, NC, VA, OH, FL, IA, and NH. And Missouri becomes a kind of wild card, even before Arizona.

    H'mm. I'm not terribly into this, anymore.

    by Knarfc on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:20:17 PM PDT

    •  Wisconsin and Michigan (0+ / 0-)

      are in the big. There have been a lot of polls from Wisconsin and it shows Obama up big. Not as many polls in Michigan but Obama was leading big in the last few ones.  The RCP average for Wisconsin is 12% lead and a 11% lead in Michigan for Obama. They are in the bag. I am hundred percent confident of that. Also, he's been consistently polling well in VA, I think you can count that O's column as well, although, I'm not as confident about it as MI and WI yet.

    •  I agree with your analysis re AZ and PA (0+ / 0-)

      also WI and MI, but the trouble with the rest is that it not merely simple probability calculation for VA, NC, and FL.  If he loses  FL, for example, he is likely to lose VA and NC.  I think Romney win Iowa and MO.  NH doesn't matter.  But with the above scenario, Obama still wins with Ohio.  Ohio is more likely to swing independently of the 3 southern battlegrounds.

    •  Swap NJ for PA in your battleground list (0+ / 0-)

      and I'd agree. Romney will not beat the Philly Democratic machine. Pa is securely in Obama's column.

  •  New poll out of Virginia (0+ / 0-)

    from WaPo shows up Obama up 51-44, very similar to PPP. The number that stood out to me the most though was for black voters back Obama 97-1! That is insane not surprising though.

  •  Come on Alaska. With half the Republicans (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Senor Unoball, pademocrat

    writing in Ron Paul, we can do this.

  •  Winning the Presidency (0+ / 0-)

    is important, and do-able.

    But without Congress, it's meaningless.  Gotta start looking at congressional races, balances, and coattails soon.

    I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

    by trumpeter on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:41:57 PM PDT

    •  Meaningless? (0+ / 0-)

      On the contrary, it can make all the difference.

      Do you know what kind of hell we would face with another Republican trifecta?

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:52:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Read what i said. (0+ / 0-)

        "Trifecta" (your word, not mine) means them winning the presidency, which would be a global disaster.

        But winning the presidency and even remaining with the balance we have in Congress now would be nearly as bad.  Nothing would get done, and progress would remain stopped, or reversed.

        Without congress to back him up in a real way, winning the Presidency is not a great victory, and right now we need a real win - the White House, and enough seats to actually get something done in Congress.

        I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

        by trumpeter on Fri May 04, 2012 at 10:58:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kind of hard to picture (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Be Skeptical

    Texas as a Swing State but yes it be some day.  

    Not soon enough though.

  •  If We Lose All States Won By 6% Or Less (0+ / 0-)

    Obama would still have 272 electoral votes. That would be;
    IN 1%       11 ec votes
    NE CD 1% 1 ec vote
    NC 1%      15 ec votes
    FL 2%       29 ec votes
    OH 4%      18 ec votes
    VA 6%       13 ec votes

    The next one by order of margin is the western state of Colorado, won by 8% with 9 electoral college votes.

  •  The Pyrrhics are coming! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This map is nice. Very nice. I don't see Rmoney pulling this out barring some October surprise.

    But, the map looked great in 2008, too. We all felt great.

    Then the shit hit the fan in '10. I hope this map is correct, that we even add a few states and make it even bluer for Obama.

    But the challenge this year is not the Presidency. It's Congress and the state races.

    It will do us no good to wake up in November with another blowout Obama win, but not get the House back. Or - god forbid - lose the Senate. We need real working majorities in both houses, and the leadership to - well - lead those majorities.

    The conservative/GOP strategy is clear. Gridlock in DC so nothing gets done. A states rights Supreme Court knocks down everything that does get done, or did get done - even 70 years ago.

    Then they took the states in '10. You think ALEC just popped up out of nowhere, overnight? You think it's some kind of spontaneous combustion that ignited all the batshit crazy anti-women, anti-tax, anti-labor, voter id, anti-choice, anti-everything we stand for legislation across the country?

    What's more important? Obama winning Wisconsin, or Wisconsin winning Wisconsin? Getting their legislature back. Recalling Asshat Walker. The freaking Progressive homeland and the Badgers are fighting for their lives, and for shit they won decades ago.

    Fighting for collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan??????? Hello! Are you kidding me???

    Same in NH. If Obama takes it, but the Dems don't get the legislature back and lose the governorship - both well within the realm of possibility - is NH better off? Is that really a "win".

    Does Obama winning NH get state funding for higher education restored, and the cost of UNH back to normal? Forget the Magna Carta bullshit. The education funding cut was real, and it hurt scores of New Hampshire families. There's crazy, and then there's evil.

    Ohio, Penn, and Florida are important. Will always be important. They are important because millions of people live in those states and need progressive Democrats leading them. Giving them the economic opportunities and the quality of life that only a progressive government can give them.

    The President wins nothing if he doesn't pull in tons - tons - of Democrats with him.

    Dear Republicans: The Handmaid's Tale is fiction, not a plan.

    by BobBlueMass on Thu May 03, 2012 at 03:54:29 PM PDT

  •  Need 1 out of 4 states (0+ / 0-)

    I think Obama will win PA, CO, NV, and NM.  

    Along with all the other usual states like in the midwest and northeast, I figure he has to only win one of these 4 to win the White House.

    New Hampshire

    One of those 4 will put him over 270.

  •  Q is out with (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    a better PA poll then we've seen in some time, and PPP will go into the field with an Iowa poll this weekend, and I bet that's improved for O as well...

    "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

    by JackND on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:01:45 PM PDT

  •  The Electoral Map (0+ / 0-)

    Barring a major catastrophe between now and November, the President carries NV, NM, CO, OH, PA, FL, VA and possibly AZ and NC.


    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:05:00 PM PDT

  •  a bicoastal plurality as needed /nt (0+ / 0-)

    slutty voter for a "dangerous president"; Präsidentenelf-maßschach; Warning-Some Snark Above"Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Sciant terra viam monstrare." 政治委员, 政委!

    by annieli on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:10:02 PM PDT

  •  Isn't it too early to start making predictions? (0+ / 0-)

    Not trying to be pessimistic or anything, but I think we still need to see where the economy goes in the next 5 months. Are we going back to recession? Is Europe going to have an impact? Will there be some International happenings (or even domestic happenings) that could change things?
    I would be very careful, very cautious and very vigilant. I live in NC and I have seen things happen in last minutes over the years ... just saying.

  •  Kos May Be Right. More Grief For the Rust Belt. (0+ / 0-)

    This wouldn't bother me. It's a more diversified country. Those old rust belt states are stuck in the past.

    " In my first term, we repealed the policy known as "don't ask, don't tell" -- -- wait, though; in my second term, we will replace it with a policy known as, it's raining men." Barack Obama

    by wild hair on Thu May 03, 2012 at 04:48:27 PM PDT

  •  Can Obama win in a landslide? (0+ / 0-)

    I can't believe that the GOP is nominating Mitt-A-Sketch.  They spent so many years insisting that Massachusetts isn't real America and that it's a corrupt and lawless place where married gay couples lynch heterosexuals, every street corner has a drive-thru abortion clinic, and everybody has wild orgasmic sex in the middle of the street.

    Mitt-A-Sketch is stuck between a rock and a hard place.  He can uphold his record in Massachusetts and badmouth his party, or he can uphold his party and badmouth his state.  As we can see, he's picking the latter option.

    Now is the time to point out that not only his Mitt-A-Sketch flip-flopping, his whole party is.

    I'd like to see Obama win in the biggest landslide since FDR.  While being Mormon makes Mitt-A-Sketch a favorite son in Utah, I think Obama could win in other states a Democratic nominee normally can't even dream of winning.

    It would be SO great to see the Republicans asking what's the matter with Kansas!

    You might be a Rethug if you join forces with the tobacco lobbyists but condemn abortion, birth control, and gay marriage as crimes against humanity.

    by jhsu on Thu May 03, 2012 at 06:01:16 PM PDT

    •  I believe it will be a landslide. I always wanted (0+ / 0-)

      Romney to be the GOP Nominee. And the best thing about him being at the top of the ticket means that we hold the Senate and make major gains in the House.

  •  Your analysis is exactly why Florida, Ohio and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Be Skeptical

    Virginia ARE important. Penn is in the bag and not worth discussing.

    We don't have to lift a finger and the Western States that you mention will be more blue. That means that Romney needs to spend the dollars there and will have less to combat us in the 3 states I mentioned.

    Romney can't win without carrying all 3 of those states.

  •  Hope Obama can win without Florida (0+ / 0-)

    I live in South Florida and I don't really think that Florida can be won this time around. This state has really lost it's way, beginning with the governor and going on down the line. The people in this state are just crazy.

  •  I'm going to be horrified (0+ / 0-)

    if PA turns red.

    Pennsyl-tucky, indeed.

    "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

    by CFAmick on Thu May 03, 2012 at 08:30:39 PM PDT

  •  Obama Opens 25th Florida Office (0+ / 0-)

    Today from Bloomberg:

    Three days before President Barack Obama holds his first “official” campaign rallies, 200 supporters snacked on cupcakes at an opening of the re-election committee’s Tampa-area office -- its 25th in Florida.

    This from theguardian on April 4:
    In Florida, the Obama re-election campaign already has 23 offices firing on all cylinders. Between them, they claim to have put together 6,500 training sessions, planning sessions, house parties and phone banks. Events are being staged across Florida at a rate of up to 30 a day.

    Romney until recently had three offices in Florida, all directed to his primary battles. Yet despite the fact that no Republican has won the White House while losing Florida since Calvin Coolidge in 1924, Romney closed all three offices after the January 31 primary.

    Calls to the main number of Romney's Florida headquarters are sent to voicemail; the mailbox is full and will not accept further messages.

    •  Even with 25 offices opening (0+ / 0-)

      I don't see Obama taking Florida. The people in South Florida are pretty disappointed with Obama and this area (Palm Beach County) is more blue than the rest of the state. The people in Palm Beach county voted in crazy Alan West to represent us. He is running again for re-election and will probably win.

  •  AZ vs OH/FL/VA/PA is meaningless (0+ / 0-)

    Hey, I love this kind of insider baseball as much as anyone (I came in at #25 in the 2008 Kos electoral poll sweepstakes - forgot to allocate a Nebraska vote).  

    But this analysis is ridiculous. I guarantee that these two  options are mutually exclusive. If Obama takes AZ, he'll take all 4 of the others.   If he loses all 4, no one will even mention the massive loss in AZ.

    To be fair, I concede that under some bizarre circumstance he might lose one of the 4 and win AZ, but that is not only highly unlikely but renders this analysis irrelevant anyway, since it is predicated on the loss of all 4 and an AZ win.

    Let's get real, folks.

  •  Texas? really? (0+ / 0-)
    And by broadening the playing field (Arizona this year, and Texas, Georgia and Montana in future cycles), and locking down old battlegrounds (Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and possibly Wisconsin and Michigan) the GOP's path to presidential victory becomes increasingly complicated.
    Is Texas really getting more progressive? At least Austin is weird. (Punk, Technology, politics-my blog)

    by greenpunx on Thu May 03, 2012 at 09:30:58 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site